Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Gerald C. Rum iittorney chmtn?al " Honorable R. Judeon Balah County Attorney Rqlor county Seymour, Texas OpinionAo. O-3816 Ret k!hetherthe demrlbed 8exWcee furnishedby a pubUa utility oorporation rubjeot the aorpora- tlon to the provisiona of ArtMEg 7828a,V.A.C.J. Your letter of July 24, 3.941,matter that a public utility corporation furnLrhln8 eleetrlc.pover vithla your. County ala0 operate8 an ioe plant end vbolerales an4 retells ice* that in the eelline of ice the amporation haa acmuaitted note celoulnted to prevent or hinder legitinate competl~loa ln the ice buslnere. Pertnining thereto, you ssk our opinion upan the question stated by mu a# follovrr 3s till8pwtlcrular 8erri~0, fllrtieh&byapublle utlllty,of au& a natawe u to acme vlthl~~ the pmwUlon8 of ~rtiole 7428a,Retired Civil Statutes, Seation I & XI; and ii 80, do the #t8 Of t&l* oanpai4 UonfititUt% a dir- wlmination vhlah I# prohlblted by the Statute?” --Seation 1 and Se&Ion 2 05 hrtiele 742& (A&r 1935, 44th Lsgielature, pa&e 118, Chnpter44) read a8 iollovar "Seotion 1. That monopolle8 are aontrmy to the pub- and it &all hereafter la HmorsbleR. JudeonBalah, page 2 "se0t1on 2. It eh4ll hereafter b8 tmlmful for e~lgpa-eon, pemaerehlp, mimmy, or aorpmtlaa, dc4aeatic or foreign, engaged in MY such 4 mblio UtllltY buelnesa In more th4n one mmlalpellty or county lu thle State, to in r&se, prluee, or kind of eoreleee a fnvcirof pereon, p4rtnerehip, ampany, oorporation or munlelpallt~ tar the purpoee of preYeS&R o? hindaxl- ?Lngocdnpotitlon in auah bualmss or 1nJurl.q 4 ocmpet:toz-." (l!38@4el8ourrr) It la m4IlUoet, In ow oplnlon, th4t thle le.*v4e enacted to regulatepubllqutility oorpor4tlone when -Rod in rendering pub110 utlUt7 eerrieee. The exproeelone and/or ;yubllcutllltloe" and “in ewh bueIneee" dmonetrste alnll4.%? thle intent. It fe our opinion, emr8ooer, that the iae barlneee cmnot be held to b8 B pubUa utlllty vithin the purviw OP this act* In ffulf Rtatee tItlllt7 Cat+ay ve. State, )Q &W.&d) 1018, 1021, 1.022,(vrlt M’u88d) it We widt "liethewfors a&mlude that, in abeeme of 8 leglala- tlve emuftment, the eemu$4atum and l4le of loa to the public 3n Texae 18 not 4 pubUo utllltg buainoe(r u a aurtber 0r l.av. “In deoiding the rbo+e qwrtlon, ve are not lmlding thst a legie&tlve en4otm0nt dealming loe to be l publlo utilfty, OF th4t the iae barSnare fr airwted at& fbe publlo intweet aad rubjeet to eom ahMotor of p\&uo regulation, vould not be upheld by the oourte. RQ‘3uoh legiel4tion bar been emoted lo Texas, and *t.t puortlan ’ need not be deteralwd illth.t.8 04e8.' The a480 lnvolwd 8 ubll6 utlllty 0OrpoPatlon engaged in M a&snovledgedpubPio utility bueinsee and, 3.q ,4dditlon, In the 1Oe bueim3ee. T hl e Ap p elluIt o o ntended tb 4 t lee had gmm to be a aameodlty needed madused by the pub110 80 generally that it had beaome 4 publle nee0eelty, and the* and eelllng iae to Uu publla’ it8 burlneee of e8enufWturZ.n in Fwke vaa thaw&we 4 pube 0 utility buef.n86e,4nd entitled to claealflcMlon undo the Franahiee 'texAH 4e 4 $Ubllo utlllty aorporation'. . ." ,.’ X3 cor?clude likevise in the ocmatructfon or’ Article 742%. It le our oplnicm that a corporation till be aubjact to its spoclfla provlelone only in relation to its bue:lneesvhlch, as a nattor of 3.m in Texae, le a public utllfty bualmee. We have protemaittad nny dleaurtslonof other etatutee of Texas &lob might be applloeble to tae situation you have deuclrlbed. We mnetrue your repwet to be vfth reftmime to the statute diecueeed, and to ft.only. APPPRGVTD AUG7, 1941 (Signed) GRcMERSlZUSRS FIRST AssIaTAHT ATTGRrn cE%maAL